1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to a structure of an instrument panel portion which is to be set up on the front side of a front seat of a vehicle.
2. Description of the Prior Art
Conventional structures of an instrument panel portion for use in vehicles, of the type mentioned above, are disclosed, for example, in Japanese Laid-Open Patent Publication Nos. Sho 48-64646 (U.S. Pat. No. 3,724,357) and Hei 1-190551 as illustrated in FIGS. 25 and 26, respectively.
In the structure of FIG. 25, crush pads 2 are provided on an upper surface portion and an upper front surface portion of an instrument panel 1, and a duct 3 is integrally formed with this instrument panel 1.
Similarly, in the structure of FIG. 26, an instrument panel body 5 comprises half-split panels, i.e., an upper instrument panel portion 6 and a lower instrument panel portion 7. A groove 9 for guiding and receiving a wire harness 8 is formed in the lower instrument panel portion 7.
The conventional structure of FIG. 25 has the following problems. Since the duct 3 is integral with the instrument panel 1, it is necessary to change the configuration of the duct 3 whenever a model or type of the vehicle is changed, in accordance with a new instrument panel of that vehicle because instrument panels are usually different in width, etc. for each model or type of vehicles. This means that the duct 3 must be redesigned (or newly designed) and manufactured for each model or type of vehicles.
Similarly, the conventional structure of FIG. 26 has the following problems. Although the workability of wiring or arranging operation of a wire harness 8 is good compared with one in which the wire harness is arranged on a vehicle body side, workability is bad with respect to ducts because a plurality of split ducts must be connected. Besides, whenever the size of the instrument panel body 5 is changed, it is necessary to change or redesign the configuration of the duct in accordance with the change of the size of the instrument panel body 5, as in the above-mentioned prior art.
Furthermore, in the above-mentioned two conventional examples, it is difficult to say that workability is good because various electric equipments such as a meter, etc., must be individually arranged.